Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Khan & Ors [2018] EWHC 94 (QB) (30 January 2018)

Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Khan & Ors [2018] EWHC 94 (QB) (30 January 2018)

The court held that the additional grounds (C1-C7) satisfied the tests for granting permission to bring contempt proceedings, that the Claimant's conduct did not preclude the addition of new grounds, and that it was in the interests of justice for all grounds to be litigated together. The 2nd Defendant's application to strike out was refused. Case management directions were made to adjourn the committal application for a consolidated hearing.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 94 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Limited; 1st Defendant: Kamar Abbas Khan; 2nd Defendant: Shafiq Sultan; 3rd Defendant: Dr Asef Zafar; 4th Defendant: Mohammed Shazad Ahmed
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Contempt Proceedings (committal Application) / Interlocutory Application and Case Management Prior to Final Hearing
Outcome
Application granted in part; case management directions issued; committal application adjourned for consolidated hearing.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Forgery, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Abuse of Process, Expert Evidence, Case Management, Relief From Sanctions
Civil Procedure Insurance Law Personal Injury Professional Misconduct Contempt of Court Forgery Fraudulent Misrepresentation Abuse of Process +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Limited

Claimant

Kamar Abbas Khan

1st Defendant

Shafiq Sultan

2nd Defendant

Dr Asef Zafar

3rd Defendant

Mohammed Shazad Ahmed

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contempt Proceedings (committal Application) / Interlocutory Application and Case Management Prior to Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission should be granted to add further grounds of contempt against the 1st Defendant
  2. 2 Whether the 2nd Defendant's application to strike out should be allowed
  3. 3 Whether the new and existing grounds should be litigated together

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the additional grounds (C1-C7) satisfied the tests for granting permission to bring contempt proceedings, that the Claimant's conduct did not preclude the addition of new grounds, and that it was in the interests of justice for all grounds to be litigated together. The 2nd Defendant's application to strike out was refused. Case management directions were made to adjourn the committal application for a consolidated hearing.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; case management directions issued; committal application adjourned for consolidated hearing.

Orders

  • Committal application in relation to all four defendants adjourned to March 2018 for a 10-day hearing.
  • Claimant permitted to include Grounds C1-C7 against the 1st Defendant.